[ARCHIVED THREAD] - I recently examined and tested an Arizona Regulator three position FRT (Page 4 of 8)
|
Quoted: The AZR 3 Position is essentially just the back portion (trigger reset cam) of the Rare Bread system, but separated from the cartridge style trigger unit from what I am seeing? I love this day and age of the FRT! Good times ahead! If you look at the what was originally patented By Brian Blakely (723) and then assigned to Rare Breed/ABC group it was a separate cam module that mounted identical to a DIAS. This was a two position system FRT/Safe.    Later Blakely got a second patent (247) for the single module version (then assigned it to Rare Breed/ABC group) This was a three position system: Fire/FRT/Safe. 
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Thanks for the info! Now if only there was a diagram of how to modify that disconnector.. Quoted: Aside from the C&D they sent him, what legal problems does he have with G? At least from the letter, it looks like they just asked him to make it clearer that they weren't affiliated or endorsing his product in any way. On the discos... he used to advertise that it works with the SSA. But apparently there was a design revision at some point (G confirmed this in one of the other threads that has since been locked) and part of the disco sits up a little too tall. It interferes with the bottom of the AZR lever. Given what Savage has said about operation without a disconnector at all, yeah... nah, don't do that. Appreciate that info. Which part of the disco? The whole flat surface that is above the disconnector spring? I wish there was a graphic somewhere. |
|
Quoted: Thanks for the info! Now if only there was a diagram of how to modify that disconnector.. Appreciate that info. Which part of the disco? The whole flat surface that is above the disconnector spring? I wish there was a graphic somewhere. It has to do with where the cam on the AZR pushes down on rear portion of the trigger to force the trigger to reset. Anything above the plane of the top surface of the trigger channel (rear portion of the trigger) will cause the action to bind up . |
|
Quoted: It has to do with where the cam on the AZR pushes down on rear portion of the trigger to force the trigger to reset. Anything above the plane of the top surface of the trigger channel (rear portion of the trigger) will cause the action to bind up . What's strange is with the disconnector spring installed, it binds - without the spring it does not. It seems as if because the disconnector in the newer SSA is shorter, the AZR arm drops behind/below the disconnector as it moves slightly down and is unable to roll back to the fully up position. (Does that make sense?) I don't see how this can be fixed, even if someone rounds off that drop-off on the back of the disconnector. (maybe?) The space between the disco and the arm. When the arm moves, it drops under the spring-loaded disco and seems to push it down just enough not to allow it to reset. It's almost as if because it has less material, it drops onto the trigger bar and does not engage the disconnector, locking the trigger up. https://imgur.com/a/o8OWG3y I really wish someone could experiment with this. (AZR-15M2-R and current production Geissele SSA) |
|
Quoted: What's strange is with the disconnector spring installed, it binds - without the spring it does not. It seems as if because the disconnector in the newer SSA is shorter, the AZR arm drops behind/below the disconnector as it moves slightly down and is unable to roll back to the fully up position. (Does that make sense?) I don't see how this can be fixed, even if someone rounds off that drop-off on the back of the disconnector. (maybe?) The space between the disco and the arm. When the arm moves, it drops under the spring-loaded disco and seems to push it down just enough not to allow it to reset. It's almost as if because it has less material, it drops onto the trigger bar and does not engage the disconnector, locking the trigger up. https://imgur.com/a/o8OWG3y I really wish someone could experiment with this. (AZR-15M2-R and current production Geissele SSA) Quoted: Quoted: It has to do with where the cam on the AZR pushes down on rear portion of the trigger to force the trigger to reset. Anything above the plane of the top surface of the trigger channel (rear portion of the trigger) will cause the action to bind up . What's strange is with the disconnector spring installed, it binds - without the spring it does not. It seems as if because the disconnector in the newer SSA is shorter, the AZR arm drops behind/below the disconnector as it moves slightly down and is unable to roll back to the fully up position. (Does that make sense?) I don't see how this can be fixed, even if someone rounds off that drop-off on the back of the disconnector. (maybe?) The space between the disco and the arm. When the arm moves, it drops under the spring-loaded disco and seems to push it down just enough not to allow it to reset. It's almost as if because it has less material, it drops onto the trigger bar and does not engage the disconnector, locking the trigger up. https://imgur.com/a/o8OWG3y I really wish someone could experiment with this. (AZR-15M2-R and current production Geissele SSA) Attached File https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/ARIZONA-REGULATOR-dropped-America-s-FRT-in-EE-QandA-ask-the-Inventor-Manufacturer-/5-2792809/?page=18 |
|
OP, THANK YOU! I think I’ve Subscribed and re-read every thread on FRT’s, SS’s, RB’s, and finally decided to purchase an AZR 2 position. Then I changed my mind to a 3 position. Then when JD was not on the forum any more I backed off because I still had “resemblance to a DIAS” issues. Now, after reading this, I’m ready to purchase an AZR-15A1 3P !! |
|
Quoted: Is the disconnector issue with new Geissele triggers limited to the SSA/SSA-E or am I going to need to modify a SD3G? |
|
Quoted: It seems that because the unit pushes on the disco, it causes the trigger to not allow reset based on how the SSA is designed to function. Perhaps I'm wrong here, please correct me if so. WRT the original AZR; Not sure about the G triggers, but with a mil spec, the trigger reset happens whether the unit rests on the disconnector OR the trigger tail. The only difference being whether the hammer is caught by the disco first or whether it is caught on the sear surface of the trigger. No hammer follow occurs because the forced reset doesn't allow it. The trigger is already forced forward BEFORE the bolt carrier releases the hammer to be caught on the sear. That said, its up to the individual user to decide if they would rather have the device act on the disco tail or the trigger tail. Acting on the disco tail disables disconnector function while the AZR is installed, but the forced reset doesnt allow hammer follow. Installed to act on the trigger tail, (which requires clearancing the back of the disconnector for the leg of the device) would appear to allow the disconnector to operate normally, catching the hammer as the bolt carrier travels back, but then dropping from the disconnector onto the sear once the forced reset occurs. Which method is less likely to cause legal problems? If the sear surface or hammer hook gets so worn that you get hammer follow without the disconnector functioning for every shot, you'd get it with the disconnector working anyway, only with a slight delay. But if the disconnector does work for every shot, the operation is more like a regular semiauto. But that requires modding the disconnector to clear the AZR leg. It's a catch-22. Either method is better than removing the disconnector altogether. And either is probably fine. |
|
Quoted: I have been following and reading all of the information on the FRT since RB's first go round. It was an interesting turn of events. Thanks OP for examining and weighing in on the mechanical operation and legalities of the Arizona Regulator AZR-15A1. It is very fortunate for us that you are willing to give your professional opinion. I wanted to ask, for my own clarification. After installing the AZR-A1 system, is it then, by only removing the drop in unit (containing the camming levers) and firing, this, could induce a malfunction or hammer follow? Or is it by removing the 'disconnector' and firing, that this could potentially cause an illegal malfunction? I guess I was confused between it being 'which part' if it were removed that would induce malfunction. I read where the same malfunction, could occur with the RB design if those parts are removed. A lot of us now have options to choose in the forced reset design fire control. I like the ability of higher rates of fire. I'm excited about buying more ammo. With the 3 position AZR, you can pop out the toggle unit and have hammer follow immediately without making any changes to the gun. |
|
The original 2 position never lets the disconnector even come into play. The disconnector cannot engage unless the trigger is in the held back position. The trigger reset happens on the backstroke of the bolt. The same backstroke has forced the hammer back. Since the trigger is already reset, the hammer grabs the sear and is release again back the fingers reciprocal pull. Trimming the tail of the disco allows for the most reliable and deisired setup. Pushing on the disco is too variable and should not have even been an option. JD should have just included a disco that was already reprofiled. Method 1 was always a custom option with the best potential result. Method 2 was for the masses but has caused redacted confusion. The MBT2 option is the most safe and no need to reprofile the disco. |
|
Quoted: The original 2 position never lets the disconnector even come into play. The disconnector cannot engage unless the trigger is in the held back position. The trigger reset happens on the backstroke of the bolt. The same backstroke has forced the hammer back. Since the trigger is already reset, the hammer grabs the sear and is release again back the fingers reciprocal pull. If the leg of the AZR is on the top of the disconnector, then the disconnector won't be allowed to function, that's why he instructs you to remove the disconnector spring while fitting it, to make it easy for the disconnector to bottom out in the trigger tail to tune the reset for no binding. This method requires an AZR with a shorter leg since the disconnector tail sits higher than the trigger tail. Externally, the shooter won't notice a difference in function. |
|
@RoccoOnFire Got one! Thanks for the heads up. |
|
Quoted: We don't have to be best friends for him to sell me a great product that works. I kinda like his saltiness. In my experience it's the overly friendly salesman that I worry about. I have a couple of these regulators. Who knows!!! They could be the DeLorean of FRTs down the road! LOL |
|
Quoted: We don't have to be best friends for him to sell me a great product that works. I kinda like his saltiness. In my experience it's the overly friendly salesman that I worry about. If he were just gruff or "salty" I'd agree. Unfortunately, dude comes off as batshit crazy. |
|
Quoted: If he were just gruff or "salty" I'd agree. Unfortunately, dude comes off as batshit crazy. Quoted: Quoted: We don't have to be best friends for him to sell me a great product that works. I kinda like his saltiness. In my experience it's the overly friendly salesman that I worry about. If he were just gruff or "salty" I'd agree. Unfortunately, dude comes off as batshit crazy. If a crazy person makes a good product then great ?? |
 I want what works. HK are total d-bags, but their stuff works. JDs works too. I just ordered another. It's an R rated world out there, some of you sound like you may need some parental guidance. There are ways to clean up a GI trigger too. Honestly I haven't noticed that I didn't have a clean breaking 4lb pull when in 3rd position doing bursts, mag dumps, fire and maneuver incorporating James T. Kirk shoulder rolls with zips in the wire and calling in artillery on my position. But granted, I bet it would go better with a lighter cleaner trigger pull. |
Milspec trigger job Simple MilSpec AR-15 Trigger Job and Improvement |
|
Quoted: What's strange is with the disconnector spring installed, it binds - without the spring it does not. It seems as if because the disconnector in the newer SSA is shorter, the AZR arm drops behind/below the disconnector as it moves slightly down and is unable to roll back to the fully up position. (Does that make sense?) I don't see how this can be fixed, even if someone rounds off that drop-off on the back of the disconnector. (maybe?) The space between the disco and the arm. When the arm moves, it drops under the spring-loaded disco and seems to push it down just enough not to allow it to reset. It's almost as if because it has less material, it drops onto the trigger bar and does not engage the disconnector, locking the trigger up. https://imgur.com/a/o8OWG3y I really wish someone could experiment with this. (AZR-15M2-R and current production Geissele SSA) Yes the AZR slipping off the back of the disco could be an issue with ANY AZR-15M2 unit as the leg is shortened to push against the disco. The leg is supposed to be long enough that it will push the disco down into the trigger and bottom out and then RESET the trigger. That is why you function test it without the spring so you can be sure the AZR leg will have a solid push. But what happens when the disco tail isnt long enough for good engagement? And it has a slight taper? Maybe the AZR leg slips past the disco tail and binds? This is mostly related to the M2 version. Its suppsed to be "drop in" ready but really only works within a defined spec. No suprise there. The geissele triggers are hit or miss. Obviously lots of users here want a nice geissele trigger to work DROP IN without any disco reprofiling. They dont want to modify their geissele triggers. I dont blame them but it may be necessary as you have posted. Those willing to grind on their geissele disco would be better suited to buy the original AZR-15 and fit it as the online instructions say (Method 1) and then reprofile the disco to stay out of the AZR's way. |
|
Quoted: If you follow the OP's links he graciously provided, you will see that there is patent litigation happening right now. We might get some clarification on the patent questions. Frankly, patents are not something consumers need to concern ourselves with. Buy what you can, and give nothing back. |
|
Quoted: Can you patent an effect? It sounds like that's what the lawfare is trying to claim but it's not unusual for different drugs to accomplish the same thing without violating each others patents. It’s part of Rare Breed’s settlement with the DOJ. Rare Breed is required to make a good faith attempt at protecting their patent. Rare Breed seems to interpret that as litigating against any company selling a forced reset device, even if that device achieves the forced reset through a different mechanism. Complicating the issue are preexisting forced reset patents like the one for a 1911 that predates the RB patents by 80+ years. https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/The-1911-force-reset-patent-from-80-years-ago/5-2791645/ There is also an IP holding company related to Rare Breed that is purchasing IP related to forced reset technology, which leads people to believe that Rare Breed is trying to litigate or purchase their way to a cornered market on FRTs. |
|
Quoted: Frankly, patents are not something consumers need to concern ourselves with. Buy what you can, and give nothing back. Quoted: Quoted: If you follow the OP's links he graciously provided, you will see that there is patent litigation happening right now. We might get some clarification on the patent questions. Frankly, patents are not something consumers need to concern ourselves with. Buy what you can, and give nothing back. That’s part of why people have turned on Rare Breed. Rare Breed has threatened litigation against people printing super safeties for personal use because according to them, it violates their patent. There were screenshots in one of the ARFcom Rare Breed threads of a Rare Breed rep threatening home brewers discussing super safeties on some social media platform. So according to their line of thinking, mere consumers are fair game. |
|
Quoted: It’s part of Rare Breed’s settlement with the DOJ. Rare Breed is required to make a good faith attempt at protecting their patent. Rare Breed seems to interpret that as litigating against any company selling a forced reset device, even if that device achieves the forced reset through a different mechanism. Complicating the issue are preexisting forced reset patents like the one for a 1911 that predates the RB patents by 80+ years. https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/The-1911-force-reset-patent-from-80-years-ago/5-2791645/ There is also an IP holding company related to Rare Breed that is purchasing IP related to forced reset technology, which leads people to believe that Rare Breed is trying to litigate or purchase their way to a cornered market on FRTs. Quoted: Quoted: Can you patent an effect? It sounds like that's what the lawfare is trying to claim but it's not unusual for different drugs to accomplish the same thing without violating each others patents. It’s part of Rare Breed’s settlement with the DOJ. Rare Breed is required to make a good faith attempt at protecting their patent. Rare Breed seems to interpret that as litigating against any company selling a forced reset device, even if that device achieves the forced reset through a different mechanism. Complicating the issue are preexisting forced reset patents like the one for a 1911 that predates the RB patents by 80+ years. https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/The-1911-force-reset-patent-from-80-years-ago/5-2791645/ There is also an IP holding company related to Rare Breed that is purchasing IP related to forced reset technology, which leads people to believe that Rare Breed is trying to litigate or purchase their way to a cornered market on FRTs. Rarebreeds doing the governments work for them. Reckon they get little badges too |
|
Quoted: That’s part of why people have turned on Rare Breed. Rare Breed has threatened litigation against people printing super safeties for personal use because according to them, it violates their patent. There were screenshots in one of the ARFcom Rare Breed threads of a Rare Breed rep threatening home brewers discussing super safeties on some social media platform. And they can get fucked. This is why they won't see a dime from me. |
|
Quoted: And, they’re gonna again. Damnit! I was sitting on a work call when they went on sale. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was frightened to buy a second 3 position last time they were made available. I wish you had posted this thread about 10 days ago!  JD has been releasing more about every 3 days. He'll probably release a few tomorrow They're in stock right now actually. https://arizonaregulator.com/arizona-regulator-azr-15a1-combat-trigger-3-position/ https://i.imgur.com/JNMFEv4.jpeg And, they’re gonna again. Damnit! I was sitting on a work call when they went on sale. Back in stock as of now https://arizonaregulator.com/arizona-regulator-azr-15a1-combat-trigger-3-position/ 
|
|
Quoted: Rarebreeds doing the governments work for them. Reckon they get little badges too Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Can you patent an effect? It sounds like that's what the lawfare is trying to claim but it's not unusual for different drugs to accomplish the same thing without violating each others patents. It’s part of Rare Breed’s settlement with the DOJ. Rare Breed is required to make a good faith attempt at protecting their patent. Rare Breed seems to interpret that as litigating against any company selling a forced reset device, even if that device achieves the forced reset through a different mechanism. Complicating the issue are preexisting forced reset patents like the one for a 1911 that predates the RB patents by 80+ years. https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/The-1911-force-reset-patent-from-80-years-ago/5-2791645/ There is also an IP holding company related to Rare Breed that is purchasing IP related to forced reset technology, which leads people to believe that Rare Breed is trying to litigate or purchase their way to a cornered market on FRTs. Rarebreeds doing the governments work for them. Reckon they get little badges too Yup, those guys are regular little junior G-men. |
|
Quoted: Back in stock as of now https://arizonaregulator.com/arizona-regulator-azr-15a1-combat-trigger-3-position/ https://i.imgur.com/JNMFEv4.jpeg Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was frightened to buy a second 3 position last time they were made available. I wish you had posted this thread about 10 days ago! JD has been releasing more about every 3 days. He'll probably release a few tomorrow They're in stock right now actually. https://arizonaregulator.com/arizona-regulator-azr-15a1-combat-trigger-3-position/ https://i.imgur.com/JNMFEv4.jpeg And, they’re gonna again. Damnit! I was sitting on a work call when they went on sale. Back in stock as of now https://arizonaregulator.com/arizona-regulator-azr-15a1-combat-trigger-3-position/ https://i.imgur.com/JNMFEv4.jpeg Thanks. I picked one up last night. I’ll probably get another one in a couple of weeks, so others can have a turn. |
|
Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. Ugh, you really should have used a little bit of goggles capabilities before you posted that. It would have fascinated you. But you probably know that by now |
|
Quoted: And they can get fucked. This is why they won't see a dime from me. Quoted: Quoted: That’s part of why people have turned on Rare Breed. Rare Breed has threatened litigation against people printing super safeties for personal use because according to them, it violates their patent. There were screenshots in one of the ARFcom Rare Breed threads of a Rare Breed rep threatening home brewers discussing super safeties on some social media platform. And they can get fucked. This is why they won't see a dime from me. Agreed. I bought two of the FRT-15L3s from Delta Team Tactical without knowing that Rare Breed was using DTT to sell on the down low. Since reading the multiple threads discussing all Rare Breed’s antics with the litigation and shell companies, that will be the last of my money they get. They’ve gone way beyond good faith and are squarely in patent troll territory imo. |
|
Quoted: https://i.postimg.cc/yxrSvMrY/1543838794903.jpg I want what works. HK are total d-bags, but their stuff works. JDs works too. I just ordered another. It's an R rated world out there, some of you sound like you may need some parental guidance. There are ways to clean up a GI trigger too. Honestly I haven't noticed that I didn't have a clean breaking 4lb pull when in 3rd position doing bursts, mag dumps, fire and maneuver incorporating James T. Kirk shoulder rolls with zips in the wire and calling in artillery on my position. But granted, I bet it would go better with a lighter cleaner trigger pull. The guy seems to think arfcom is trying to do a Ray Epps/J6 on him. It ain't a matter of "unpleasant truths." Its more "what the fuck are you smoking?" His device looks awesome and has a great rep. But...I get why people are saying he's off-putting. |
|
Quoted: The guy seems to think arfcom is trying to do a Ray Epps/J6 on him. It ain't a matter of "unpleasant truths." Its more "what the fuck are you smoking?" His device looks awesome and has a great rep. But...I get why people are saying he's off-putting. Quoted: Quoted: https://i.postimg.cc/yxrSvMrY/1543838794903.jpg I want what works. HK are total d-bags, but their stuff works. JDs works too. I just ordered another. It's an R rated world out there, some of you sound like you may need some parental guidance. There are ways to clean up a GI trigger too. Honestly I haven't noticed that I didn't have a clean breaking 4lb pull when in 3rd position doing bursts, mag dumps, fire and maneuver incorporating James T. Kirk shoulder rolls with zips in the wire and calling in artillery on my position. But granted, I bet it would go better with a lighter cleaner trigger pull. The guy seems to think arfcom is trying to do a Ray Epps/J6 on him. It ain't a matter of "unpleasant truths." Its more "what the fuck are you smoking?" His device looks awesome and has a great rep. But...I get why people are saying he's off-putting. Not arfcon, just one guy who called and asked loaded questions. It was definitely a conflict of interest if nothing else. But calling was kinda sketchy IMO |
|
Quoted: Yes the AZR slipping off the back of the disco could be an issue with ANY AZR-15M2 unit as the leg is shortened to push against the disco. The leg is supposed to be long enough that it will push the disco down into the trigger and bottom out and then RESET the trigger. That is why you function test it without the spring so you can be sure the AZR leg will have a solid push. But what happens when the disco tail isnt long enough for good engagement? And it has a slight taper? Maybe the AZR leg slips past the disco tail and binds? This is mostly related to the M2 version. Its suppsed to be "drop in" ready but really only works within a defined spec. No suprise there. The geissele triggers are hit or miss. Obviously lots of users here want a nice geissele trigger to work DROP IN without any disco reprofiling. They dont want to modify their geissele triggers. I dont blame them but it may be necessary as you have posted. Those willing to grind on their geissele disco would be better suited to buy the original AZR-15 and fit it as the online instructions say (Method 1) and then reprofile the disco to stay out of the AZR's way. I think the problem isn't the leg length, but it's that the disco profile is too short (Geissele changed it) compared to the one JD used on his build and it slips off per the images posted here: (Page 18, post 5) https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/ARIZONA-REGULATOR-dropped-America-s-FRT-in-EE-QandA-ask-the-Inventor-Manufacturer-/5-2792809/?page=18 I say that because it will pass function check without disconnector installed or with the disco spring removed but disco still present. (it jingles around and stays disengaged, which defeats it's purpose entirely) Again, both of these scenarios will pass function tests, but operating a rifle this way is a concern. (For a few reasons) |
|
Quoted: The issue is they keep going after things outside their patent, and they know those things are outside their patent...and that is not even taking into consideration whether their patent(s) are valid. Maybe they are doing that on purpose to fulfill their requirements but also not actually accomplish anything? |
|
Quoted: Maybe they are doing that on purpose to fulfill their requirements but also not actually accomplish anything? Quoted: Quoted: The issue is they keep going after things outside their patent, and they know those things are outside their patent...and that is not even taking into consideration whether their patent(s) are valid. Maybe they are doing that on purpose to fulfill their requirements but also not actually accomplish anything? They wouldn't have filed actual lawsuits if that was case. They wouldn't have served people at a FIREARMS INDUSTRY EVENT of that were the case. FUCK rare greed |
|
Quoted: Frankly, patents are not something consumers need to concern ourselves with. Buy what you can, and give nothing back. Absolutely, if you want to be the type that just wants to slide the little package off the hook down at your local purveyor of evil goodness. It does not take a great deal of effort to follow these behind-the-scenes developments to understand more of the reasons why the things you buy do certain things, don't do other things and are designed as they are. Not mention the much-hashed discussions of philosophical reasons of why you might want to point your money in certain directions. I agree, stack them deep. But I also think that being an informed consumer is not such a bad thing. |